▲ | toomuchtodo 4 days ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We can still use policy to disadvantage the economics of offshoring, we just haven’t gotten there yet. This took time, that will take time. Does it suck that billions of people were born into lesser global economic circumstances? Absolutely. Does that mean we should allow corporations to exploit labor (both imported and citizens who have to compete against that imported labor) at the disadvantage of domestic citizens? No. This is workers vs capital, not immigrants vs citizens. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | Fordec 4 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There's a logically fallacy in there. Throwing up border walls does not stop capital. Capital can still exist outside the borders and work with the supply chains of the other countries minus 1. And pick an inflow metric that capital cares, and the US does not control more than 50% of it. number of consumers, GDP, income growth, all of it. The capital will continue to service the bigger number that remains offshore through cutting the US out of that pie reciprocally. The US as a feature of it geography and population (Japan, UK and the Philippines) can choose isolationism as a policy. But the rest don't have it as an option due to direct contact to neighbors or economics too small to sustain. Most of the world will not follow the on-shoring path, because they cannot. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|